Intra-consortia data sharing platforms for interdisciplinary collaborative research projects

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-28
Author(s):  
Max Schröder ◽  
Hayley LeBlanc ◽  
Sascha Spors ◽  
Frank Krüger
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Central Interest ◽  
Large Research

AbstractAs the importance of data in today’s research increases, the effective management of research data is of central interest for reproducibility. Research is often conducted in large interdisciplinary consortia that collaboratively collect and analyse such data. This raises the need of intra-consortia data sharing. In this article, we propose the use of data management platforms to facilitate this exchange among research partners. Based on the experiences of a large research project, we customized the CKAN software to satisfy these needs for intra-consortia data sharing.

scholarly journals Perceptions and Attitudes toward Data Sharing among Dental Researchers

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Spallek ◽  
S.M. Weinberg ◽  
M. Manz ◽  
S. Nanayakkara ◽  
X. Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
International Association ◽  
Improve Patient Care ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Past Experiences

Introduction: Increasing attention is being given to the roles of data management and data sharing in the advancement of research. This study was undertaken to explore opinions and past experiences of established dental researchers as related to data sharing and data management. Methods: Researchers were recruited from the International Association for Dental Research scientific groups to complete a survey consisting of Likert-type, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Results: All 42 respondents indicated that data sharing should be promoted and facilitated, but many indicated reservations or concerns about the proper use of data and the protection of research subjects. Many had used data from data repositories and received requests for data originating from their studies. Opinions varied regarding restrictions such as requirements to share data and the time limits of investigator rights to keep data. Respondents also varied in their methods of data management and storage, with younger respondents and those with higher direct costs of their research tending to use dedicated experts to manage their data. Discussion: The expressed respondent support for research data sharing, with the noted concerns, complements the idea of developing managed data clearinghouses capable of promoting, managing, and overseeing the data-sharing process. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Researchers can use the results of this study to evaluate and improve management and sharing of research data. By encouraging and facilitating the data-sharing process, research can advance more efficiently, and research findings can be implemented into practice more rapidly to improve patient care and the overall oral health of populations.

scholarly journals Using playful methods to understand children’s digital literacies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pekka Mertala
Keyword(s):  
Digital Literacy ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Digital Literacies ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Meaningful Research

This chapter is the final for Section 3 and in many ways stands as an example of how many of the individual elements presented thus far in the book, can come together in a holistic way. This chapter demonstrates how we can adopt play, make it unique to the project and the children and still arrive at meaningful research data. This chapter describes a research project wherein 3- to 6-year-old Finnish children’s digital literacies were studied and supported via playful methods. The key theses this chapter advocates are:-The use of playful methods in early childhood education (ECE) research is one way to acknowledge and respect the characteristics of the research context.-The ambiguity of play should be acknowledged when planning, conducting, and evaluating playful research projects.-Studying and supporting children’s digital literacies do not always require digital devices.The chapter is structured as follows. First, a reflective discussion on the ambiguity of play and the use of playful methods as a context-sensitive research approach is presented. Then, an overview of the research project and its objectives are provided. In the end, three concrete examples of how the children’s digital literacy was studied and supported using playful methods are given.

scholarly journals Research Data Management - Current status and future challenges for German non-university research institutions

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mareike Petersen ◽  
Bianca Pramann ◽  
Ralf Toepfer ◽  
Janna Neumann ◽  
Harry Enke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Research Data ◽  
University Research ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
World Cafe ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
Scientific Fields

This report describes the results of a workshop on research data management (RDM) that took place in June 2019. More than 50 experts from 46 different non-university institutes covering all Leibniz Sections participated. The aim of the workshop was the intra- and transdisciplinary exchange among RDM experts of different institutions and sections within the Leibniz Association on current questions and challenges but also on experiences and activities with respect to RDM. The event was structured in inspiring talks, a World Café to discuss ideas and solutions related to RDM and an exchange of experts following their affiliation to the different Leibniz sections. The workshop revealed that most institutions, independent of scientific fields, face similar overarching problems with respect to RDM, e.g. missing incentives and no awareness of the benefits that would arise from a proper RDM and data sharing. The event also endorsed that the Research Data Working Group of the Leibniz Association (AK Forschungsdaten) is a place for the exchange of all topics around RDM and enables discussions on how to refine RDM at all institutions and in all scientific fields.

scholarly journals A gestão dos dados de pesquisa no âmbito da comunidade dos pesquisadores vinculados aos programas de pós-graduação brasileiros na área da Ciência da Informação: desvendando as práticas e percepções associadas ao uso e reuso de dados | The management of research data within the community of researchers linked to Brazilian post-graduate programs in the area of Information Science: unveiling the practices and perceptions associated with the use and reuse of data

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilherme Ataíde Dias ◽  
Renata Lemos Dos Anjos ◽  
Débora Gomes De Araújo
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Formal Control ◽  
Community Of Researchers ◽  
E Mail ◽  
Science Information

RESUMO A pesquisa investigou as práticas e percepções associadas com a gestão de dados pelos pesquisadores na pós-graduação brasileira na área da Ciência da Informação (CI). O instrumento de pesquisa utilizado foi um questionário semiestruturado, enviado por e-mail para 341 pesquisadores vinculados aos programas de pós-graduação brasileiros em CI. Os dados obtidos foram analisados através de técnicas de estatística descritiva e análise temática. Verificou-se que as práticas de gestão de dados conduzidas pelos pesquisadores precisam ser aprimoradas e que eles possuem postura favorável com relação ao compartilhamento de dados, desde que exista algum controle formal sobre os mesmos.Palavras-chave: Dados de Pesquisa; Compartilhamento de Dados de Pesquisa; Ciência da Informação; Tecnologia da Informação.ABSTRACT The research investigated the practices and perceptions associated with data management by researchers in Brazilian postgraduate programs in the Information Science (IC) area. A semi-structured survey was used as the research instrument, it was sent by e-mail to 341 researchers linked to the Brazilian postgraduate programs in CI. The data was analyzed through descriptive statistics techniques and thematic analysis. It was found that the data management practices conducted by the researchers need to be improved and that they have a favorable approach regarding data sharing, provided there is some formal control over them.Keywords: Research Data; Research Data Sharing; Information Science; Information Technology.

scholarly journals A collective challenge: Open Science from the perspective of Science Europe

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-430
Author(s):  
Marie Timmermann
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
Management Policies ◽  
Good Research ◽  
Quality Of Research

Open Science aims to enhance the quality of research by making research and its outputs openly available, reproducible and accessible. Science Europe, the association of major Research Funding Organisations and Research Performing Organisations, advocates data sharing as one of the core aspects of Open Science and promotes a more harmonised approach to data sharing policies. Good research data management is a prerequisite for Open Science and data management policies should be aligned as much as possible, while taking into account discipline-specific differences. Research data management is a broad and complex field with many actors involved. It needs collective efforts by all actors to work towards aligned policies that foster Open Science.

scholarly journals The History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Smale ◽  
Kathryn Unsworth ◽  
Gareth Denyer ◽  
Daniel Barr
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Management ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Multiple Use ◽  
Funding Body ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Recent Developments

AbstractData management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rates of data sharing, and institutional planning and compliance benefits.In this manuscript, we explore the international history of DMPs and describe institutional and funding body DMP policy. We find that economic and societal benefits from presumed increased rates of data sharing was the original driver of mandating DMPs by funding bodies. Today, 86% of UK Research Councils and 63% of US funding bodies require submission of a DMP with funding applications. Given that no major Australian funding bodies require DMP submission, it is of note that 37% of Australian universities have taken the initiative to internally mandate DMPs.Institutions both within Australia and internationally frequently promote the professional benefits of DMP use, and endorse DMPs as ‘best practice’. We analyse one such typical DMP implementation at a major Australian institution, finding that DMPs have low levels of apparent translational value. Indeed, an extensive literature review suggests there is very limited published systematic evidence that DMP use has any tangible benefit for researchers, institutions or funding bodies.We are therefore led to question why DMPs have become the go-to tool for research data professionals and advocates of good data practice. By delineating multiple use-cases and highlighting the need for DMPs to be fit for intended purpose, we question the view that a good DMP is necessarily that which encompasses the entire data lifecycle of a project. Finally, we summarise recent developments in the DMP landscape, and note a positive shift towards evidence-based research management through more researcher-centric, educative, and integrated DMP services.

scholarly journals A survey of researchers' needs and priorities for data sharing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
James Harney ◽  
Lauren Cadwallader
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Reuse ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Do So

PLOS has long supported Open Science. One of the ways in which we do so is via our stringent data availability policy established in 2014. Despite this policy, and more data sharing policies being introduced by other organizations, best practices for data sharing are adopted by a minority of researchers in their publications. Problems with effective research data sharing persist and these problems have been quantified by previous research as a lack of time, resources, incentives, and/or skills to share data. In this study we built on this research by investigating the importance of tasks associated with data sharing, and researchers’ satisfaction with their ability to complete these tasks. By investigating these factors we aimed to better understand opportunities for new or improved solutions for sharing data. In May-June 2020 we surveyed researchers from Europe and North America to rate tasks associated with data sharing on (i) their importance and (ii) their satisfaction with their ability to complete them. We received 728 completed and 667 partial responses. We calculated mean importance and satisfaction scores to highlight potential opportunities for new solutions to and compare different cohorts.Tasks relating to research impact, funder compliance, and credit had the highest importance scores. 52% of respondents reuse research data but the average satisfaction score for obtaining data for reuse was relatively low. Tasks associated with sharing data were rated somewhat important and respondents were reasonably well satisfied in their ability to accomplish them. Notably, this included tasks associated with best data sharing practice, such as use of data repositories. However, the most common method for sharing data was in fact via supplemental files with articles, which is not considered to be best practice.We presume that researchers are unlikely to seek new solutions to a problem or task that they are satisfied in their ability to accomplish, even if many do not attempt this task. This implies there are few opportunities for new solutions or tools to meet these researcher needs. Publishers can likely meet these needs for data sharing by working to seamlessly integrate existing solutions that reduce the effort or behaviour change involved in some tasks, and focusing on advocacy and education around the benefits of sharing data. There may however be opportunities - unmet researcher needs - in relation to better supporting data reuse, which could be met in part by strengthening data sharing policies of journals and publishers, and improving the discoverability of data associated with published articles.

scholarly journals Archaeological Analysis in the Information Age: Guidelines for Maximizing the Reach, Comprehensiveness, and Longevity of Data

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah W. Kansa ◽  
Levent Atici ◽  
Eric C. Kansa ◽  
Richard H. Meadow
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Information Age ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Reproducible Research ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
The Past ◽  
Archaeological Analysis ◽  
The Web

ABSTRACTWith the advent of the Web, increased emphasis on “research data management,” and innovations in reproducible research practices, scholars have more incentives and opportunities to document and disseminate their primary data. This article seeks to guide archaeologists in data sharing by highlighting recurring challenges in reusing archived data gleaned from observations on workflows and reanalysis efforts involving datasets published over the past 15 years by Open Context. Based on our findings, we propose specific guidelines to improve data management, documentation, and publishing practices so that primary data can be more efficiently discovered, understood, aggregated, and synthesized by wider research communities.

What’s So Funny ’bout PECE, TAF, and Data Sharing?

2021 ◽  
pp. 115-140
Author(s):  
Mike Fortun ◽  
Lindsay Poirier ◽  
Alli Morgan ◽  
Brian Callahan ◽  
Kim Fortun
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Ethnographic Research ◽  
Global Collaboration ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Digital Infrastructure ◽  
Collaborative Ethnography

This chapter points out different ways involvement with collaborative projects share form, shape, or style, and may be imagined as nested within each other, like matryoshka dolls. It deals with the Platform for Experimental Collaborative Ethnography (PECE), the digital infrastructure that support new collaborative projects in anthropology. It also cites the long-standing collaboration of The Asthma Files (TAF), which is an experimental ethnographic research project that eventually led to the conceptualization and development of PECE. The chapter mentions the Digital Practices in History and Ethnography Interest Group (DPHE-IG) that was organized within the Research Data Alliance (RDA), a global collaboration of individuals and institutions working to make data more easily and openly shareable. It emphasizes how the collaborative form is the experimental form analyzed by Hans-Jorg Rheinberger as essential to a modern scientific style.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document